4 minutes ago, plonkster said:

I normally hold by the mantra that one should not blame malice when incompetence is an adequate explanation. When it comes to government, that is often true. Not that everything they do is bad (of course not), and not that there aren't capable people there (of course there are), just that at the end of it... you usually find the reason something went a certain way was because something was neglected... rather than purposefully planned. This does not mean however that a politician cannot come afterwards and claim success. Which they often do :-)

Let them, deep in their heart they know they are dependent on engineers.

Monopolies can work for a single buyer and for a single seller.

Single buyer: "Well, who else are you going to sell to, so I am forcing you to take the unreasonably poor price I am offering".

Single seller: "You can't get this product elsewhere, so i am forcing you to take my offering at a unreasonably high price".

The problem with a domestic solar scheme is "the man" has got you both ways, and has imposed capacity allowance rules to make status quo permanent.

The future?

Have a look at this concept, a swiss pilot project, a community based ESS scheme whereby members of the community can trade energy between themselves based on crypto currency, so market forces apply and no-one can be the monopoly.

www.quartier-strom.ch  (use google translate)

 

 

Until someone borrows against crypto futures, buys up all the capacity and becomes a new micro monopoly.

10 minutes ago, DeepBass9 said:

I don't think the registering is anything that sinister, probably more for statistics sake for planning future demand. Why build more powerstations if the private sector is installing rooftop solar at a faster rate?

I agree. The grid is not designed for solar system per household, and households can afford their own, versus the country being bankrupt, and future planning required for the grid. 

And on top of that, not all DB installations are on par with regulations.

So I see it as a double whammy, see what is already there, see what is planned, fix up that what has been neglected, so that we can plan forward for a more renewable grid - that is for CoCT Municipality, and others, but I cannot see that happening for the country, Eskom cannot do it.

 

3 minutes ago, plonkster said:

Not just yet.

If they can claim it now to win elections ... then I say DO IT!!!

And as I said, we need more investment as a city, and by them taking a wee bit of credit where they may not be allowed to, to get more investment into say renewables, whilst dealing with the multitude of opinions and not favoring any particular segment of society ... they have a tough ride at best. Solar can become another toilet or water fiasco.

4 minutes ago, phil.g00 said:

a swiss pilot project,

We are in SA where there are more people who cannot afford electricity, than the ones who can. And of the ones who can, even less can afford solar. :-) 

I made a joke during power failures. I said they will continue until Sipho and Matwetwe cannot charge their phones for they still get paid a salary and they don't need Eskom as we need it. So until they cannot charge their phones, who cares about failures.

1 minute ago, DeepBass9 said:

Until someone borrows against crypto futures, buys up all the capacity and becomes a new micro monopoly.

My understanding is Crypto is just the enabler to decentralize and streamline the trade. Its about being able to pay bill and invoice.

I don't see that part as mission critical. Billing for energy has taken place since forever with paper and ink.

1 hour ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

And as I said, we need more investment as a city, and by them taking a wee bit of credit where they may not be allowed to, to get more investment into say renewables, whilst dealing with the multitude of opinions and not favoring any particular segment of society ... they have a tough ride at best. Solar can become another toilet or water fiasco.

OK... you do make an excellent point :-)

1 hour ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

If they can claim it now to win elections ... then I say DO IT!!!

On that topic... I read a really humourous discussion where people were answering the question: How did so many evangelicals vote for Trump (the guy asking the question obviously dislikes this choice and thinks such people acted in contradiction to what they say they stand for). Not that I want to discuss this... this is just context for the absolutely brilliant reply one guy gave: That as a rule, religious people tend to favour the whore and the tax collector over the Pharisee.

I could not have put it bette.  Then I thought of our own elections, and I must tell you that often I feel pretty similar about our local ruling party. I do not for a moment think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread... yet they may yet do some good. And the truth is that just about the entire country votes in this tactical manner on some or other level...

I'm getting more reports now that Cape Town is refusing to accept applications for larger Victron inverters with the Ziehl anti-islanding relay. Oh what fun it is going to be...

6 minutes ago, plonkster said:

I'm getting more reports now that Cape Town is refusing to accept applications for larger Victron inverters with the Ziehl anti-islanding relay. Oh what fun it is going to be...

Pray tell us more?

Or let me guess. You can have a 3kw no problem, but 5 or 10kw or bigger, even with a Ziehl, is not going to fly by them?

26 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Or let me guess. You can have a 3kw no problem, but 5 or 10kw or bigger, even with a Ziehl, is not going to fly by them?

It sounds like they won't accept it unless it is on "the list".

2 minutes ago, plonkster said:

It sounds like they won't accept it unless it is on "the list".

I did not see that coming ... HKGK.

7 hours ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

I did not see that coming ... HKGK.

Famous last words 😅

40 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

Famous last words 😅

No serious. If I had a device that when combined with a Ziehl with engineer/s agreeing all the boxes are ticked, I would cause drama. 

5 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

No serious. If I had a device that when combined with a Ziehl with engineer/s agreeing all the boxes are ticked, I would cause drama. 

I am with you on this. But their reactions just confirm that this is more about making money than being legal and safe.

12 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

But their reactions just confirm that this is more about making money than being legal and safe.

Am not so sure. See I support a team to the end, if they turn out to be on the wrong side ... then I go for the "throat".

At the moment I think the CoCT guys are doing the best they can. I recon it is pure confusion of the regulations with too may cooks in that kitchen ... cooks who cannot take the heat.

But, having said that ...

Sanity will prevail but it is going to take some seriously hard effort, effort which most of us don't have the time nor energy for.

Then again I sit and wonder ... with the cooks and all that and "follow the money".

CoCT gets no money at all for registering right, so no "vested monetary benefits". Anyone who wants to feed back, the deck is stacked, they don't want you too ... yet.

So who does stand to gain IF a inverter range/s are taken off the list? CoCT gets NO monetary benefit. So who does?

Edited January 15, 20197 yr by Guest

10 minutes ago, The Terrible Triplett said:

Am not so sure. See I support a team to the end, if they turn out to be on the wrong side ... then I go for the "throat".

At the moment I think the CoCT guys are doing the best they can. I recon it is pure confusion of the regulations with too may cooks in that kitchen ... cooks who cannot take the heat.

But, having said that ...

Sanity will prevail but it is going to take some seriously hard effort, effort which most of us don't have the time nor energy for.

Then again I sit and wonder ... with the cooks and all that and "follow the money".

CoCT gets no money at all for registering right, so no "vested monetary benefits". Anyone who wants to feed back, the deck is stacked, they don't want you too ... yet.

So who does stand to gain IF a inverter range/s are taken off the list? CoCT gets NO monetary benefit. So who does?

Think about it. On our holiday at Balito, I was told by my friend that they are not allowed to, by law, to take their own garden refuse (fallen tree branches, mowed lawn, etc) to the dump. By law, they are forced to used a registered garden refusal company at an expense about 4 times of what I would have paid in Ekuruleni for the same service. I am allowed to take my own garden refuse to the dump and I know when we lived in Port Edward (different municipality) that we could take our own garden refuse to the dump as well. In Johannesburg we could also take our garden refuse to the dump ourselves. I know Ekuruleni asks an "admin fee" if it's more than 1 tonne per trip. Can't remember for City of Johannesburg.

 

What I am getting at? The people who benefit the most from this ordeal are the refuse removal services as they pay a set "license fee" but can charge whatever they feel like. Who implemented it? The municipality - but this makes me believe someone who has a "cousin" in the municipality, and whom at the same time own a few garden removal services got this enforced.

In Magaliesburg over the weekend, my friend told me a similar story, though or something totally different. Again, their municipality benefited much less from the matter than the service providers.

 

So I suspect something similar is happening in CoCT. They probably don't have the expertise 'in-store' for all of this and rely on 3rd party 'solar experts' for advice and support in this matter.

 

Somewhere, someone always benefit from other's efforts.

11 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

What I am getting at? The people who benefit the most from this ordeal are the refuse removal services as they pay a set "license fee" but can charge whatever they feel like. Who implemented it? The municipality - but this makes me believe someone who has a "cousin" in the municipality, and whom at the same time own a few garden removal services got this enforced.

Yup. I've had thoughts like that too. What if "the list" is a way to channel business to a particular brand? But it can't be... too many diverse things on it. And there is no other money involved. So I did consider this... but cannot see where the crime is being perpetrated. So I am with TTT on this. Probably a matter of "If unsure, reject it" which will hopefully be overturned in time.

FWIW... I had another look at the Axpert, and I think it might be possible to approve it. But you can't do it by the SANS-10142-2-1 UPS rules (because the transfer switch is not fully interlocking and all that Jazz), you'd have to go for full compliance, ie prove that it opens the safety relay within the required time and that all the harmonics and noise and power factor and stuff is as required (which should be easy... since it does not feed in). So who knows...

34 minutes ago, plonkster said:

Yup. I've had thoughts like that too. What if "the list" is a way to channel business to a particular brand? But it can't be... too many diverse things on it. And there is no other money involved. So I did consider this... but cannot see where the crime is being perpetrated. So I am with TTT on this. Probably a matter of "If unsure, reject it" which will hopefully be overturned in time.

FWIW... I had another look at the Axpert, and I think it might be possible to approve it. But you can't do it by the SANS-10142-2-1 UPS rules (because the transfer switch is not fully interlocking and all that Jazz), you'd have to go for full compliance, ie prove that it opens the safety relay within the required time and that all the harmonics and noise and power factor and stuff is as required (which should be easy... since it does not feed in). So who knows...

Probably not a brand, but rather a company / group of companies that benefit from this?

 

If / since Victron paid to have this inverter to be listed and it was removed, do they need to pay again? If so, to whom?

 

22 minutes ago, plonkster said:

Probably a matter of "If unsure, reject it" which will hopefully be overturned in time.

I lean towards this one the most yes.

FWIW. If I had a Multiplus / Quattro with a Ziehl installed ... I would have caused a huge fiasco if it was declined. 

Whilst the arguments raged to and fro, I would have registered as an off-grid site YET doing everything as per grid tied, i.e. electrician and CoC, engineering checks and all the tests, to ensure all was 100% as per regulations for grid tied, insurance and all that ... even it if was registered as off-grid.

As much as I am pro regulations, do it right, there is a point where I say ENOUGH with this nonsense.

Case sample. Because of CoCT insistence on a R150 connection fee and that we must register, they are now losing about R1k per month from this household. After 24 months my investment would be recouped. 

Two can play this game, and they need us more than we need them. 

3 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

If / since Victron paid to have this inverter to be listed and it was removed, do they need to pay again? If so, to whom?

Multiplus and Quattro's where never on the list, with a Ziehl they would meet all the tick boxes.

Multiplus II and Multigrid is still on the list.

Monies are paid to a testing house.

1 hour ago, DaveSA said:

Ouch !  - so some some Blue Stuff relegated to the same status as Axperts 

In some European countries the Multi's and Quattro's meet the regulatory standards, just not in CoCT as CoCT needs more. Therein the Ziehl being on the list as a "catchall" to meet the requirement.

So here is the thing. If one has spent many times more than a Axpert on a blue device, trust me when I say, if that was me, they would have picked a fight that ain't gonna go away soon. 

Same applies to the Axpert ranges. The question is: Is the motivation there to pick a fight? 

19 minutes ago, SilverNodashi said:

If / since Victron paid to have this inverter to be listed and it was removed, do they need to pay again? If so, to whom?

You don't pay to get listed either. Well, you pay to get tested, but usually to either Bureau Veritas or Primara... which are international entities. So again, nothing seems amiss.

2 minutes ago, DaveSA said:

Would the more pertinent consideration not be as to how close your system is to being off-grid  - Inverter specific obviously, then rather invest the money on your system than CoCT compliance regs.

For me (I have a Multigrid that is on the list), the cost of getting it signed off is around 5k. The cost to expand to get off-grid is about ten times that. So it is an easy decision.

If I already had my consumption covered 90% (as one person told me), then it might cost less just to take the whole thing off-grid.

17 minutes ago, DaveSA said:

... then rather invest the money on your system than CoCT compliance regs.

Ditto what Plonkster said. My bill is a wee bit more than R5k yet taking a house off grid with Eskom on your doorstep, she is not cost effective.

If it was just me and the wife ... then I would be off-grid yes.

But if I had a Ziehl ... and they said no ...

 

for me and the Mrs it was easy to switch off and go full off-grid. We use a string inverter throughout the day and battery via the bidirectional s at night. we use a total of between 89ah to 128ah from the batteries without switching off everything or worrying about anything. I pay the R185 pm availability fee for " in case". with the oversized system i can pull max around 10500w during a sunny day and have 50400kw of battery online and a backup gel /agm bank of 37440kw for in case of bad weather......

Just decided not to want to know about COCT reg system nor Eskom anymore.. even tho i am a registered user with Swartland that used to push approx 74kwh back to grid per day..their small print is " we only credit up to and equal to your purchase from us"  so that did not help me at all..... no more freebies...

On 2019/01/08 at 8:32 AM, plonkster said:

 

I looked through the whole thing again just two days ago, considering both NRS097-2-1 and SANS 10142-2-1. The former says that if you're using a UPS as an embedded generator (you are), then SANS tells you what is needed.

In an email reply to me Marius Fourie of Greenpro Consulting gave the explanation following this comment. There seems to be confusion regarding the meaning of "grid connected" and "grid tied or grid tie" (as the Yanks describe it). I have to respect Marius' qualifications and the fact that his company consults on solar as well as the fact that he has an Axpert installed at his home, albeit in Johannesburg Metro. So confusion reigns supreme but for my sake I hope Marius is right.

 

Hi Edward,

 

“1 Scope

   This section of NRS 097-2 defines standards for the utility interface for the interconnection of small scale embedded generation to a utility network.”

 

The Title and Scope of NRS-097-2-1 states that it governs the interconnection between an embedded generator and the grid. In the case of the Axpert inverter there is no connection between any embedded generator and the grid. The Standard does therefore not apply to the inverter.

 

The NRS standard is based on IEC 61727, which states the scope as:

 

1 Scope and object

This International Standard applies to utility-interconnected photovoltaic (PV) power systems

operating in parallel with the utility and utilizing static (solid-state) non-islanding inverters for

the conversion of DC to AC. This document describes specific recommendations for systems

rated at 10 kVA or less, such as may be utilized on individual residences single or three

phase. This standard applies to interconnection with the low-voltage utility distribution system.

So it specifically refers to PV systems which operates in parallel to the grid. I.e.: It must be a grid tied inverter generating in parallel to the grid. Some Hybrid inverters have a grid tied component, but not the Axpert. 

If you consider the detail technical requirements, none of them applies if one is not generating power for delivery to the grid. 

Regards,

Marius Fourie

Pr Eng | Hons B.Eng (Elec) | CEM

www.greenpro.co.za

083 675 4800

Skype: marius.fourie

Zoom: 950-162-7453

 

 

Would it be incredibly forward of me to ask if he's read the whole thing? Granted, I have a somewhat older version, but there is a bit in there that specifically calls these unit by name (a UPS used as an embedded generator) and delegates their installation to SANS 10142-2-1. The question remains if the Axpert's transfer switch satisfies SANS. I don't think it does and I am still waiting on someone to tell explain why I have it wrong. If it complies with SANS, then it also complies with NRS097. That simple.

Edited January 15, 20197 yr by plonkster